Trouble logging in?If you can't remember your password or are having trouble logging in, you will have to reset your password. If you have trouble resetting your password (for example, if you lost access to the original email address), please do not start posting with a new account, as this is against the forum rules. If you create a temporary account, please contact us right away via Forum Support, and send us any information you can about your original account, such as the account name and any email address that may have been associated with it.

Basically, Fluff is using his own personal definition of "feminist literature" to pass judgement on the rest of the thread So... while he's "right" in that "no, none of this anime/manga really promotes modern feminism" ... he's wrong in that.. .*for Japan* - some of the material stretches the envelope. In other words, whether it is "feminist" or not rather depends on the context of the culture or of the viewer's own baggage.

He's also making outrageous assumptions about other posters, but then hey, its the Internet where some people don't believe I'm what I say I am either. Its like those MMOs where player X refuses to believe player Y is female or that anyone is female on the "net" (as I sit watching Player Y laugh her head off next to me).

I mean, isn't it just men and women are equal? One does not serve the other?

Personally I think the story of Marcela and the shepherds in Don Quixote is a pretty example of a strong female representation.

The shepherds lament that the beautiful Marcela is cruel for not loving any of them, and that she is responsible for one of their number committing suicide. Eventually she appears and says that it's not her fault that she is beautiful, and just because she is beautiful and they love her does not oblige her to love any of them in return, and that she just wants to live with nature and doesn't need to be with a man. She has the right to choose whatever lifestyle she likes, she might get married in the future, but for now wants to experience the world a bit more. The novel portrays her as being in the right, while the shepherds are basically idiots with stupid romantic fantasies.

I recommend mostly lurking until you've learnt ropes on these sites, as feminists have become so tired of repeating themselves, that they have little patience left for questions that have obvious answers if you've read the Feminist 101 blog. (And really, if you have to explain to people for the umptieth time that drugging someone and having sex with them is real rape, one's patience tend to run out.)

Personally I think the story of Marcela and the shepherds in Don Quixote is a pretty example of a strong female representation.

The shepherds lament that the beautiful Marcela is cruel for not loving any of them, and that she is responsible for one of their number committing suicide. Eventually she appears and says that it's not her fault that she is beautiful, and just because she is beautiful and they love her does not oblige her to love any of them in return, and that she just wants to live with nature and doesn't need to be with a man. She has the right to choose whatever lifestyle she likes. The novel portrays her as being in the right, while the shepherds are basically idiots with stupid romantic fantasies.

While that is indeed feminist....I dislike the thought of "women needing to be with men=weak/anti-feminst". Because it's pretty ridiculous to me. All humans need each other. Nobody actually wants to die alone, I should think. Why else would people want to get married!?

I also dislike "extreme feminism to the point of hating men". It doesn't have to go this far. We want equality, which means no bashing of either sex. >_> Man-hating women don't look any better than men who think "women are weak idiots who belong in the kitchen".

I've yet to meet a feminist that hates men. Most have men in their lives that they like, love and are comfortable around, however, many cultural depictions of feminists use the Straw Feminazi.

Basically, instead of making feminism about "making all equal" many authors think that feminism is "putting down men and elevating women", and this isn't true. Yet so many TV shows go "It's a better story if we make this extreme feminazi, nevermind that we've now represented a minority about a million times more than there actually is people thinking like this".

Many feminists will, for example, explain at great lengths why putting women on pedestals is wrong and sexist, and why portraying men as sub-human, and expecting sub-human morals, logic and ethics from them, is also sexist.

I know that when I was a kid, I thought feminism was about hating men, but that was because of inaccurate portrayals in media. I grew up, learnt about what feminism actually was, and then ran with it.

While that is indeed feminist....I dislike the thought of "women needing to be with men=weak/anti-feminst". Because it's pretty ridiculous to me. All humans need each other. Nobody actually wants to die alone, I should think. Why else would people want to get married!?

I also dislike "extreme feminism to the point of hating men". It doesn't have to go this far. We want equality, which means no bashing of either sex. >_> Man-hating women don't look any better than men who think "women are weak idiots who belong in the kitchen".

She's doesn't "hate men" in the story, she just doesn't love any of them. She has an independent streak and is enjoying her time living in the mountain's as a shepherdess, and resents the fact that men are telling her to reciprocate their love

I don't think Feminism is about hating men either, but I think a core feminist value is that women can live without men. They are free to choose their own lives, and how they'll live. A woman is her own individual. She doesn't have to love a man just because he wants her to, and she isn't a "bitch" if she doesn't reciprocate a man's feelings. She just doesn't love them.

The story is also a reaction to the tendency of pastoral literature to put women on pedestals and objectify them. Marcela isn't a pure object, she has her own desires and wants, and happens to be a bit eccentric, and wants to live outside in nature, rather then a more conventional lifestyle, and her suitors are denigrating her for it.

But I think some women's responses to the episode would be interesting. I've put her speech in spoilers below, you can judge it as you will. Excuse the kinda archaic language, the only translation online is from the 1800s, though it's fairly readable.

Spoiler for Marcela's speech:

"I come not, Ambrosia for any of the purposes thou hast named," replied Marcela, "but to defend myself and to prove how unreasonable are all those who blame me for their sorrow and for Chrysostom's death; and therefore I ask all of you that are here to give me your attention, for will not take much time or many words to bring the truth home to persons of sense. Heaven has made me, so you say, beautiful, and so much so that in spite of yourselves my beauty leads you to love me; and for the love you show me you say, and even urge, that I am bound to love you. By that natural understanding which God has given me I know that everything beautiful attracts love, but I cannot see how, by reason of being loved, that which is loved for its beauty is bound to love that which loves it; besides, it may happen that the lover of that which is beautiful may be ugly, and ugliness being detestable, it is very absurd to say, "I love thee because thou art beautiful, thou must love me though I be ugly." But supposing the beauty equal on both sides, it does not follow that the inclinations must be therefore alike, for it is not every beauty that excites love, some but pleasing the eye without winning the affection; and if every sort of beauty excited love and won the heart, the will would wander vaguely to and fro unable to make choice of any; for as there is an infinity of beautiful objects there must be an infinity of inclinations, and true love, I have heard it said, is indivisible, and must be voluntary and not compelled. If this be so, as I believe it to be, why do you desire me to bend my will by force, for no other reason but that you say you love me? Nay—tell me—had Heaven made me ugly, as it has made me beautiful, could I with justice complain of you for not loving me?

Moreover, you must remember that the beauty I possess was no choice of mine, for, be it what it may, Heaven of its bounty gave it me without my asking or choosing it; and as the viper, though it kills with it, does not deserve to be blamed for the poison it carries, as it is a gift of nature, neither do I deserve reproach for being beautiful; for beauty in a modest woman is like fire at a distance or a sharp sword; the one does not burn, the other does not cut, those who do not come too near. Honour and virtue are the ornaments of the mind, without which the body, though it be so, has no right to pass for beautiful; but if modesty is one of the virtues that specially lend a grace and charm to mind and body, why should she who is loved for her beauty part with it to gratify one who for his pleasure alone strives with all his might and energy to rob her of it?

I was born free, and that I might live in freedom I chose the solitude of the fields; in the trees of the mountains I find society, the clear waters of the brooks are my mirrors, and to the trees and waters I make known my thoughts and charms. I am a fire afar off, a sword laid aside. Those whom I have inspired with love by letting them see me, I have by words undeceived, and if their longings live on hope—and I have given none to Chrysostom or to any other—it cannot justly be said that the death of any is my doing, for it was rather his own obstinacy than my cruelty that killed him; and if it be made a charge against me that his wishes were honourable, and that therefore I was bound to yield to them, I answer that when on this very spot where now his grave is made he declared to me his purity of purpose, I told him that mine was to live in perpetual solitude, and that the earth alone should enjoy the fruits of my retirement and the spoils of my beauty; and if, after this open avowal, he chose to persist against hope and steer against the wind, what wonder is it that he should sink in the depths of his infatuation? If I had encouraged him, I should be false; if I had gratified him, I should have acted against my own better resolution and purpose.

He was persistent in spite of warning, he despaired without being hated. Bethink you now if it be reasonable that his suffering should be laid to my charge. Let him who has been deceived complain, let him give way to despair whose encouraged hopes have proved vain, let him flatter himself whom I shall entice, let him boast whom I shall receive; but let not him call me cruel or homicide to whom I make no promise, upon whom I practise no deception, whom I neither entice nor receive. It has not been so far the will of Heaven that I should love by fate, and to expect me to love by choice is idle. Let this general declaration serve for each of my suitors on his own account, and let it be understood from this time forth that if anyone dies for me it is not of jealousy or misery he dies, for she who loves no one can give no cause for jealousy to any, and candour is not to be confounded with scorn. Let him who calls me wild beast and basilisk, leave me alone as something noxious and evil; let him who calls me ungrateful, withhold his service; who calls me wayward, seek not my acquaintance; who calls me cruel, pursue me not; for this wild beast, this basilisk, this ungrateful, cruel, wayward being has no kind of desire to seek, serve, know, or follow them. If Chrysostom's impatience and violent passion killed him, why should my modest behaviour and circumspection be blamed? If I preserve my purity in the society of the trees, why should he who would have me preserve it among men, seek to rob me of it? I have, as you know, wealth of my own, and I covet not that of others; my taste is for freedom, and I have no relish for constraint; I neither love nor hate anyone; I do not deceive this one or court that, or trifle with one or play with another. The modest converse of the shepherd girls of these hamlets and the care of my goats are my recreations; my desires are bounded by these mountains, and if they ever wander hence it is to contemplate the beauty of the heavens, steps by which the soul travels to its primeval abode."

I'm not a feminist, I am a humanist. I think we're all humans and we should all be treated with dignity and respect, regardless of whether we've got a pole or a hole between our legs.

Vexx has the right of things. While most Japanese fiction media ranges from mildly to horribly sexist by Western standards, when measured against their own yardstick, it tends to fare a lot better.

Personally I believe that most bog-standard "shoujo" (and josei, as well) stories are rather sexist, exemplifying and encouraging a female ideal that is extremely appealing to the patriarchy. If little girls have that as their role models when young, they just might be more "perfect wife" material later on.

Basically, Fluff is using his own personal definition of "feminist literature" to pass judgement on the rest of the thread So... while he's "right" in that "no, none of this anime/manga really promotes modern feminism" ... he's wrong in that.. .*for Japan* - some of the material stretches the envelope. In other words, whether it is "feminist" or not rather depends on the context of the culture or of the viewer's own baggage.

Having observed a number of female friends who are into seinen anime, I've made a few interesting observations.

In general one would assume that the genre is sexist because its so utterly concerned with making female characters appealing to a male target audience.

However, my girlfriend actually expresses admiration for a lot of girls in seinen shows for being strong characters - particularly in terms of decisive decision making. I actually think a few of her favourites make decisive decisions that are actually really poorly thought out - such as Chihiro from EF (a character I also really like, BTW) and Kaori from Kanon - but she admires them regardless, probably because she's shy and wishes she could act more like that.

A lot of girls I know who watch seinen also seem to like girls that are "crazy awesome" - such as Fuko from Clannad or various yandere characters. They just happen to be pretty cute in the process.

And then there's the cosplayers I've met who take their cosplays really, really serious. To me, it feels like a fashion statement of sorts, and not one necessarily done just to impress guys.

So while I wouldn't exactly call seinen anime feminist, girls do seem to be able to identify with seinen anime culture and characters from it in an (often) positive manner. The fact that female characters in seinen run such a huge gamut of character types probably helps since it gives them a lot of choice.

(Side note: Just as an interesting historical note, the way I understand, cute culture in Japan could hardly be accused of being patriarchal when it first started. The way I understand it, it was started by girls and was a way of rebelling against ideals placed on adult women. Whether its being co-opted into a patriarchal structure since is another story, not going to try and analyze that here.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vexx

He's also making outrageous assumptions about other posters, but then hey, its the Internet where some people don't believe I'm what I say I am either. Its like those MMOs where player X refuses to believe player Y is female or that anyone is female on the "net" (as I sit watching Player Y laugh her head off next to me).

I'm amused by how much he's reading into someone's choice of Aria H Kanzaki as a signature/avatar. Sexualizing lolis? Aside from the fact that Aria is 16 as Chibi pointed out, at best, the show says that petite, waifish girls look sexy with a short skirt and thigh holsters and has bath scene or two. This isn't Queen's Blade, Aria's abrasive personality probably puts more girls off the show than any of the sexy stuff.

And I seriously LOLed at Chibi identifying with our petite, waifish gunslinger. You go girl - actually, I imagine there's a number of women who like these sorts of characters when the sexual element is keep to a moderate level (as it is in Aria) for precisely this reason.

And I seriously LOLed at Chibi identifying with our petite, waifish gunslinger. You go girl - actually, I imagine there's a number of women who like these sorts of characters when the sexual element is keep to a moderate level (as it is in Aria) for precisely this reason.

Why, thank you.

I would be using just a katana, myself. Guns make me too nervous...

But yes, they're appealing little characters; if you've been small all your life and have been regarded as a "weak and helpless kid", seeing "little girls" (who look like they're in the same boat as you) actually kicking ass and taking names is just one of the coolest things ever. Rukia, Shana, Maka, Aria, I love them all to pieces!!

hmmm in general, i like animes because they portray traditional gender roles as a GOOD thing.

so are they anti-feminist? depends on what you believe feminism is. the americanized definition is one that looks down upon traditional housewife/mother roles and values. one that looks at a woman who knows how to cook as someone who is holding themselves back and is lower than a "career-oriented" one

which is of course, bullshit

but i digress...

shoujo animes may have more main heroes that appear like jerks, but they obv have a more soft side. its no diff from women, who will say the ideal guy is someone who is "nice...but with an edgy side"

When you watch series like this, then you really have to turn off your American eyes. It's quite easy to take the American views to some of these series and question it. Often times, I fail to do so. This is in particular when fighting series that include female fighters. Many such characters have prominent roles; but eventually, they get "shoved to the side" in favor of a dominant male character.

Harems will almost never be shoujo or josei, but saying "harem" = shounen and "revserse harem" = shoujo is over generalization, since it isn't a require.

For example, Most Romance series from VN sources that have a "harem" per say generally are considered Seinen, or none since they aren't based off manga which is where the labeling tends to come from ussually.

Seinen, shounen, shoujo, and josei are demographics. If something runs in a shoujo magazine, its shoujo, regardless of content. There are things that are more common in some demographics over others, such as harems being more in seinen and shounen.

Harems will almost never be shoujo or josei, but saying "harem" = shounen and "revserse harem" = shoujo is over generalization, since it isn't a require.

For example, Most Romance series from VN sources that have a "harem" per say generally are considered Seinen, or none since they aren't based off manga which is where the labeling tends to come from ussually.

Perhaps I shouldn't have said "strictly", but generally Harems are Shounen, and Reverse is Shoujo. I can't honestly think of any time where the reverse was true IE a shoujo Harem or Shounen Reverse Harem.

Shounen and Shoujo are demographic indicators, no more, and Harem appeals to both demographics, albeit in a gender flipped fashion, which would make sense.